Yours is the faulty logic. The stated rules of the game ARE, to any reasonable person, meant to be the official statement of the creator's intention of the rules, and has always been assumed to be so in this game. Edited By: Zorva Sobek on Year 10 Day 77 22:26
The fairness of a game is based upon everyone playing by the same rules. As players, we have absolutely no way of knowing what the creator's intention is beyond what is listed as the official rules. The only fair way for players to play is to take all rules stated officially at face value, otherwise its impossible for all players to play under the same rules. Therefore, in any reasonable and fair game, the rules posted must be the rules followed by all in all cases, even if those rules were only posted by mistake.
In any game, the rules are the foundation. The are the beginning from which everything about the game is made. In a computer game such as this, the rules are the basis for everything in the game, particularly code. First the rules are made, then the code is made to act upon those rules. If the code doesn't agree with rules, then its called a bug. In any fair game, the preference is always given to the rules under which the players are told to play by.
Would anyone play chess if the moves the pieces could make weren't known, or were changed without warning at tournaments? Lets say you were playing soccer and a member of the other team tackles and kicks you in the head repeatedly, then easily scores because your team is down a man. When you go over to the ref, he says "Oh, we changed the rules so it allows for that, but accidentally forgot to tell you." Would any player, any team, any coach, any fan simply accept that? Would anyone keep playing or watching soccer if the rules were changed in such a way?
With the decisions the admins are making here, they are declaring that the rules as posted and implied to be the intended rules are no longer the actual rules of the game. The real rules of the game are what is in Veynom's mind, unknowable to the players. When the rules are unknowable, the game is not a fair one, and is therefore a sham.
Syn: is that the official decision? One side has to get the short end, so it might as well be CSA? Are the administrators so completely unable and unwilling to find any sort of equitable compromise? How can they possibly justify that and call this a fair game?
Screwed by Administrators who run the game with secret rules.